AAFS 2027

Pre-Registration Required — $165

8:00 am – 12:00 pm

Chair:
Katherine N. Scafide, PhD 
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA

Co-Chair:
Nancy R. Downing, PhD 
University of North Texas Health College of Nursing
Fort Worth, TX

Presenters:
David Lattanzi, PhD 
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA

Mehrdad Ghyabi, PhD 
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA

Ali Khaloo, PhD 
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA

Philip C. Zane, JD 
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA

Program Description: Artificial intelligence is entering forensic practice faster than practitioners can evaluate it. Vendors promise automated comparison, triage, and interpretation. Courts are beginning to ask harder questions about what these systems do and how they were built. Yet few forensic professionals, in any discipline, have been given a framework for distinguishing a well-built tool from a poorly built one or for defending an AI-assisted finding on the stand.

This half-day workshop supplies that framework and assumes no technical background whatsoever. It is also built to be worked rather than watched, with live audience-response polling integrated throughout the presentations and a live question queue running for the full session.

The session opens by demystifying the vocabulary: what machine learning, deep learning, computer vision, and generative AI actually are, what each can and cannot do, and where each is already appearing in forensic casework. It then walks through how a forensic AI model is genuinely produced (data collection, expert annotation and the ground-truth problem, training and test separation, overfitting, and validation) using worked examples drawn from pattern evidence comparison, probabilistic genotyping, digital forensic triage, bitemark and skeletal analysis, and injury imaging. Attendees see where these pipelines commonly fail and why a tool that performs well in a paper may not perform well in their laboratory.

The workshop then converts that understanding into practice. Participants receive and work through an evaluation checklist covering what accuracy claims conceal, dataset representativeness and demographic equity, generalizability, explainability versus black box design, on-device versus cloud processing, data security, and the specific questions to put to any vendor. A dedicated legal segment addresses admissibility under Rule 702 and Daubert, authentication under Rule 901, discovery of training data and source code, chain of custody for AI-derived outputs, bias as a legal exposure, and the pitfalls of testifying about an AI-assisted result.

The session closes with a fully transparent case study. The presenters walk through the development of a forensic imaging AI system from the ground up (study design, dataset construction, expert annotation, testing performance across skin pigmentation, on-device deployment, and evidentiary architecture), followed by a live demonstration and an open invitation for the audience to critique it against the very criteria taught that morning. A facilitated discussion lets attendees apply the framework to tools currently proposed or in use in their own disciplines.

Attendees leave with a written evaluation checklist, a plain-language glossary, and an admissibility reference sheet they can apply immediately to any AI tool proposed for their laboratory, clinic, or agency.

Learning Objectives: Upon completion of this workshop, attendees will be able to: (1) define the core Artificial Intelligence (AI) concepts now entering forensic practice (i.e., machine learning, deep learning, computer vision, and generative models) and describe how a forensic AI system is designed, trained, built, and validated; (2) apply a structured evaluation checklist to determine whether a proposed AI tool is fit for use in their own discipline, assessing performance metrics, dataset representativeness and provenance (including de-identification standards and re-identification risk), equitable performance across populations, explainability, and data security, regulatory and legal compliance, and mechanisms for human oversight and post-deployment monitoring; (3) identify the legal and evidentiary requirements governing AI-derived findings, including Federal Rule of Evidence 702/Daubert, discovery obligations regarding training data and source code, and chain-of-custody documentation for AI-generated outputs; and (4) critique a complete forensic AI development pipeline, from data collection through live deployment and ongoing monitoring, using the evaluation criteria taught in the session.

Impact Statement: Forensic practitioners across every discipline are now being asked to adopt, purchase, or testify about AI tools without any shared basis for evaluating them, creating direct risk to casework quality and courtroom credibility. This workshop builds cross-disciplinary competence by equipping attendees with a transferable evaluation framework and a working understanding of the evidentiary standards that AI-derived findings must satisfy. Attendees will be able to put that competence into action immediately by interrogating vendor claims, documenting AI-assisted work defensibly, and advising their agencies, laboratories, and clinics on adoption decisions.

Target Audience: Anthropology, Criminalistics, Digital & Multimedia Sciences, Forensic Nursing Science, General, Jurisprudence, Odontology, Pathology/Biology, Questioned Documents, Toxicology
Knowledge Level: Basic 

Pre-Registration Required — $300

8:00 am – 5:00 pm

Chair: 
Heather Edgar, PhD 
Office of the Medical Investigator
Albuquerque, NM

Co-Chair:
Nicollette S. Appel, PhD 
University of New Mexico
Albuquerque, NM

Presenters:
Joseph T. Hefner, PhD 
Michigan State University
Traverse City, MI

Kari Helgeson, MA -
Texas State University
San Marcos, TX

Program Description: This workshop will introduce attendees to data collection, analysis, and interpretation using FoRDent, an online program that facilitates forensic anthropological estimations of population affinity, a core component of the biological profile. Since dental traits are heritable, neutral, and often preserved even when bone is lost, they can provide useful information about an individual's population affinity. However, the tools previously available for dental morphology are limited by weaknesses in reference populations used, outdated statistical analyses, and unfriendly user interfaces, so dental morphology has been underutilized in forensic anthropology.

Attendees will participate in interactive lectures covering variation in dental morphological characteristics of the permanent dentition. The statistics behind FoRDent will be explained so that attendees can knowledgably use the tool in everyday casework. The theoretical basis of a unique feature of FoRDent, multilevel population affinity results, will be explained so practitioners can apply it in their own work. Presenters with varying levels of experience with dental analyses will describe how they use FoRDent, including providing tips and tricks for ease of use. Attendees will be provided with dental models that exemplify the range of variation commonly seen in United States forensic casework. Time will be provided for guided data collection and case analysis.

Learning Objectives: After attending this workshop, attendees will: (1) be familiar with scoring variation in dental morphological traits; (2) understand the theoretical, biological, and statistical underpinnings of FoRDent; and (3) be able to use ForDent to estimate population affinity for human skeletal remains. This workshop is relevant to practitioners, educators, and students in forensic anthropology who wish to incorporate dental morphology into their estimations of population affinity.

Impact Statement: The goal of the workshop is for attendees to be able to incorporate FoRDent in their everyday casework. Users unfamiliar with dental morphology will develop competence in data collection. Users unfamiliar with gradient boosting machine statistics and multi-level population affinity estimates will develop an understanding of these methods and results, allowing them to incorporate them into their practice.

Target Audience: Anthropology, Odontology, Pathology/Biology
Knowledge Level: Intermediate

Pre-Registration Required — $165

8:00 am – 12:00 pm

Chair: 
Nicola Pigaiani, MD, PhD 
University of Verona
Verona, Italy

Co-Chair: 
Brandi C. McCleskey, MD 
University of Alabama at Birmingham
Birmingham, AL

Presenters:
Francesco Ausania, MD, PhD 
University of Verona
Verona, Italy

Stefano Gobbo, MD, PhD 
University of Verona
Verona, Italy

Simone Grassi, MD, PhD 
University of Florence
Florence, Italy

Antonio Oliva, MD, PhD 
Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore
Rome, Italy

Biagio Solarino, MD, PhD 
University of Bari Aldo Moro
Bari, Italy

Program Description: Digital technologies are increasingly transforming forensic practice, changing how evidence is acquired, shared, analyzed, and interpreted. Histopathology provides a particularly illustrative example of this transition. Microscopic examination remains an important component of forensic investigation, contributing to the assessment of natural disease, injury, and mechanisms of death, and often providing information that cannot be obtained from gross examination alone. Advances in slide digitization now allow microscopic material to become part of a broader digital forensic workflow, while recent developments in computational image analysis and AI are expanding the possibilities for quantitative and computer-assisted evaluation.

This half-day workshop will provide a practical and critical overview of the transition from conventional to digitally augmented forensic practice. 

The first section will revisit the role and impact of histopathology in forensic investigation and examine how microscopic techniques, documentation, and interpretation have evolved over time. This will provide the foundation for discussing digital pathology and Whole Slide Imaging (WSI), including recent evidence demonstrating that WSI can be validated for forensic histopathology and achieve diagnostic performance comparable with conventional light microscopy.

The second section will examine the infrastructure required for digital practice (i.e., image acquisition, scanners, imaging systems, display requirements, image quality, file formats, storage, interoperability, data management, cybersecurity, workflow integration). Particular emphasis will be placed on the concept that implementation of digital pathology requires validation of the complete diagnostic workflow.

The workshop will then introduce the fundamental principles of AI and computational image analysis in an accessible manner, including paradigms of machine learning as well as annotation, training, and validation concepts. 

Current and emerging applications of digital pathology and image analysis in forensic science will be discussed in light of the available literature, which demonstrates growing interest in these technologies while also highlighting substantial heterogeneity in methods, applications, and validation strategies.

Potential advantages, including remote consultation, quantitative analysis, standardization, education, and integration of multimodal data, will be balanced against limitations such as image artifacts, dataset bias, automation bias, interpretability, and infrastructure requirements.

The final section will address ethical, legal, and regulatory considerations, including data governance, privacy, accountability, transparency, human oversight, validation, and the evidentiary implications of AI-supported conclusions.

This interactive workshop will examine how digital tools and AI can be responsibly incorporated as validated instruments supporting forensic professionals, while distinguishing applications that are ready for implementation from those that remain experimental.

Learning Objectives: After attending this workshop, participants will be able to describe the evolving role of histopathology and digital imaging in forensic practice, identify the technical requirements necessary for implementing digital pathology workflows, and explain the fundamental principles underlying Artificial Intelligence (AI) and computational image analysis. Attendees will critically evaluate current and emerging applications of digital technologies and AI in forensic practice, distinguishing validated uses from applications that remain experimental. Participants will also recognize major technical, ethical, and regulatory challenges associated with the implementation of these technologies in forensic pathology casework.

Impact Statement: This workshop will improve the ability of forensic professionals to critically assess and appropriately integrate digital technologies into routine practice by providing a practical framework that considers scientific validity, infrastructure, workflow, and limitations. By promoting evidence-based and responsible adoption of digital pathology and AI-based image analysis, the session aims to improve diagnostic practice, interdisciplinary collaboration, reproducibility, and the defensibility of digitally supported forensic pathology conclusions.

Target Audience: General, Pathology/Biology
Knowledge Level: Basic

Pre-Registration Required — $165

8:00 am – 12:00 pm

Chair: 
George D. Annas, MD
Forensic Psychiatry Consulting, LLC
Alexandria, VA

Co-Chair: 
Jacob Appel, MD
Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai
New York, NY

Program Description: How can you find the right expert and maximize the impact in your case? This presentation will help attendees understand the misconceptions about expert witnesses in mental health and elucidate the ways to work with them effectively. While you are the ones who know best the goals you need to achieve in your case, there remain some nuanced practical tips that can be helpful from our perspectives that can give you an edge compared to the standard mental health knowledge of most attorneys.  

We will address the following topics: when hiring the "top expert" in a subspecialty may actually backfire, ways to effectively find and vet your expert, effectively utilizing your expert to assist in deposing and cross-examining the opposing expert, and how the use of "hired gun," "expert on a mission," and the "gold-standard" experts can harm your case. We will also provide a brief review of the core types of legal proceedings requiring an expert (the "insanity defense," civil and criminal competence, the standard of care in psychiatric malpractice cases as well as others). Our two presenters include a legal expert as well as a forensic psychiatrist with over 15 years of experience who has been sworn in as an expert in the field of psychiatry in >100 cases. 

We will present sanitized case examples from the presenters' personal experience as well as a few high-profile media cases in order to help demonstrate the core topics. At the end of the workshop, attendees will acquire greater skill in ethically and effectively collaborating with forensic psychiatrists and psychologists.

Learning Objectives: After attending this workshop, attendees will: (1) understand the proper and improper roles of psychiatric expert witnesses; (2) improve skill in effectively collaborating with psychiatric experts; (3) understand the basic structure of core mental health related legal proceedings, including the insanity defense, competence to stand trial, psychiatric malpractice, and others: and (4) learn common pitfalls and how to avoid them when retaining and working with psychiatric experts.

Impact Statement: This presentation will help attorneys to better understand the proper and improper roles of forensic psychiatrists and dispel myths/misconceptions about expert witnesses in mental health. By understanding the ethical limits and proper roles of expert witnesses, the fields of law and mental health can work more effectively together.

Target Audience: Criminalistics, Jurisprudence
Knowledge Level: Intermediate

Pre-Registration Required — $300

8:00 am – 5:00 pm

Chair: 
Madeleine J. Hinkes, PhD
NAAG Forensic
San Diego, CA

Co-Chair: 
Deirdre E. Amaro, MD 
NAAG Forensic
Salt Lake City, UT

Presenters:
Leah E. Auchter, PhD 
NAAG Forensic
San Diego, CA

Emma O. Lew, MD 
NAAG Forensic
Miami Beach, FL

Evan W. Matshes, MD 
NAAG Forensic
California University of Science and Medicine
Colton, CA

Emmanuel Peña, MD 
NAAG Forensic
Children's Healthcare of Atlanta
Atlanta, GA

Program Description: Infant death investigations that raise the question of inflicted trauma are among the most consequential and contested in forensic medicine. Accurate diagnosis requires integrating findings across multiple domains — neuropathology, general autopsy, forensic anthropology, pediatric radiology, and the investigative scene — while rigorously excluding the many natural, developmental, metabolmedicolegalifactual conditions that can simulate trauma. Errors in either direction carry profound consequences: a missed inflicted injury may return a child to danger, while an over-called finding may wrongly implicate a caregiver.

This full-day workshop provides an advanced, systematic approach to the pathology of infant head, neck, and skeletal trauma. A multidisciplinary faculty of forensic pathologists, a forensic neuropathologist, forensic anthropologists, and a child abuse pediatrician presents the current evidence base for recognizing and characterizing injury in each anatomic region, followed in each case by a dedicated examination of the mimics that most often confound interpretation. Head-trauma content addresses scalp, skull, meningeal, and parenchymal injury, subdural and subarachnoid hemorrhage, and a differential that includes birth-related hemorrhage, benign extra-axial collections, coagulopathy, metabolic and genetic disease, infection, and hypoxic-ischemic change. Neck-trauma content emphasizes the craniocervical junction, spinal cord, nerve roots, and dorsal root ganglia, together with the sampling and histologic technique required to demonstrate — or exclude — injury and to distinguish it from artifact. Skeletal content covers the classic metaphyseal lesion, rib and other fractures, fracture dating, and radiologic-histologic correlation, alongside the metabolic bone disease, osteogenesis imperfecta, normal variants, and postmortem artifacts that mimic them.

The workshop's organizing contribution is a proposed, reproducible framework for the analysis of suspected infant trauma and its mimics, an explicit, stepwise method for gathering, weighting, and correlating pathologic, anthropologic, radiologic, and investigative evidence toward a defensible conclusion. The framework is developed across the didactic modules and then applied by the full faculty in an interactive, case-based session in which attendees work through real-world scenarios and test their reasoning against expert analysis.

Attendees will leave with a structured approach they can implement immediately in their own casework, a clearer understanding of the pitfalls that generate diagnostic error, and greater confidence in formulating and defending conclusions in the medicolegal setting.

Learning Objectives: After completing this workshop, attendees will be able to identify and characterize the pathologic features of inflicted and non-inflicted head, neck, and skeletal injury in infants. Attendees will be able to distinguish genuine traumatic findings from the natural, developmental, metabolic, and artifactual conditions that mimic them in each anatomic region. Finally, attendees will be able to apply a structured, evidence-based framework that integrates autopsy, neuropathologic, anthropologic, radiologic, and investigative data to reach and defend diagnostic conclusions.

Impact Statement: This workshop will strengthen diagnostic competence and performance by equipping forensic pathologists and allied practitioners with a reproducible framework that reduces error in the evaluation of suspected infant trauma — in both directions, false attribution and missed injury. Because these determinations directly shape death investigation outcomes, judicial proceedings, and the protection of surviving children, improved diagnostic accuracy carries significant stakeholder consequences.

Target Audience: Anthropology, Jurisprudence, Pathology/Biology
Knowledge Level: Advanced

Pre-Registration Required — $165

8:00 am – 12:00 pm

Chair: 
Stephanie Olofson, MS 
Colorado Bureau of Investigation
Arvada, CO

Co-Chair: 
Mikaela Romanelli, MS 
DEA
Manchester, NH

Presenters:
Lindsay Glicksberg, PhD 
Dallas County Southwestern Institute of Forensic Sciences
Lewisville, TX

James DT Miller, MA 
Houston Forensic Science Center
Houston, TX

Erin Shonsey, PhD
Alabama Department of Forensic Sciences
Auburn, AL

Program Description: Toxicology and seized drug laboratories both utilize analytical chemistry techniques to identify the drug or drugs that may be present in an item of evidence. Seized drug analysis identifies unknown substances in tablets, powders, and other evidence while toxicology involves analysis of biological matrices. Both disciplines play an important role in the effort to combat the ever-changing drug market that impacts traffic safety and public health. 

Most laboratories have analytical methods to identify the more well-known controlled and impairing substances. However, the identification of new and emerging substances can be more challenging. It is common for seized drug laboratories to identify new drugs prior to a toxicology laboratory. Collaboration between the two disciplines is important for tracking regional drug trends, identifying new substances, and supporting criminal investigations. Shared knowledge can allow both seized drug and toxicology sections to work more efficiently and effectively. 

This workshop will present workflows in seized drug and toxicology laboratories, discuss the limitations of each discipline, and explore the traditional and expanding technology used in each discipline. Presentations will conclude with case studies highlighting the collaboration and trends from across the United States. This is a Society of Forensic Toxicologists/American Academy of Forensic Sciences (SOFT/AAFS) Drugs and Driving Committee-sponsored workshop.

Learning Objectives:  Attendees will gain an understanding of the typical workflows in toxicology and seized drug laboratories, understand the limitations that each discipline faces, learn about the expanding technology that each discipline may have access to, and have the knowledge to start a collaboration with the other discipline.

Impact Statement: This workshop will impact the forensic science community by increasing attendees' understanding of the importance of collaboration between toxicology and seized drug laboratories to assist in the identification of emerging drugs and drug trends that can inform policymaking regarding impaired driving, public health, and substance use.

Target Audience: Criminalistics, General, Jurisprudence, Toxicology
Knowledge Level: Basic

Pre-Registration Required — $300

8:00 am – 5:00 pm

Chair: 
Summer J. Decker, PhD 
University of Southern California 
Keck School of Medicine
Los Angeles, CA

Co-Chair:
Edward Mazuchowski, MD, PhD 
Armed Forces Medical Examiner System
Middletown, DE

Presenters:
Fabrice H. Dedouit, PhD
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Toulouse
Toulouse, France

Jamie M. Elifritz, MD
Forensic Radiology Group
Destin, FL

Jonathan M. Ford, PhD
University of Southern California 
Keck School of Medicine
Los Angeles, CA

Yanko G. Kolev, MD, PhD
Medical University 
Pleven, Bulgaria

Michael Thali, MD
University Zurich
Zurich, Switzerland

Rick R. van Rijn, PhD 
Netherlands Forensic Institute
Den Haag, Netherlands

Program Description: Forensic imaging has evolved from a specialized adjunct into an increasingly important component of medicolegal death investigation, disaster victim identification, forensic anthropology, clinical forensic medicine, and courtroom presentation. This full-day interactive workshop provides participants with a practical introduction to contemporary forensic imaging, emphasizing PMCT while exploring emerging technologies that are transforming forensic practice.

The workshop begins with a rapid-paced PMCT Boot Camp: Race to the Cases, providing participants with the essential knowledge needed to interpret PMCT examinations. Through a systematic review of PMCT fundamentals, common interpretive pitfalls, radiologic-pathologic correlation, and an introduction to the hands-on interpretation session, attendees will develop a practical framework for approaching forensic imaging cases while preparing for the hot seat.

Building upon this foundation, faculty will present contemporary applications of forensic imaging, including PMCT interpretation, forensic identification, pediatric forensic imaging in both the living and deceased, forensic anthropology, crime scene imaging, three-dimensional visualization and printing, as well as quantitative tools to help with analyses. Participants will also explore emerging technologies and future directions in forensic imaging, including advanced visualization techniques, workflow innovations, artificial intelligence, and evolving multidisciplinary collaboration.

The workshop culminates in hands-on interactive PMCT case review, where participants apply concepts learned throughout the day to real forensic cases with expert faculty guidance. Emphasis will be placed on practical scene, scanner and beyond imaging methods, systematic image interpretation, radiologic-pathologic correlation, diagnostic reasoning, cutting edge visualization and quantitative analyses, as well as multidisciplinary collaboration.

Designed for radiologists, forensic pathologists, medical examiners, coroners, death investigators, anthropologists, trainees, and other forensic professionals, this workshop provides practical knowledge that participants can immediately integrate into forensic imaging practice while offering a glimpse into the rapidly evolving future of the field.

Participants will need a private Windows-based (or Mac with Dual Boot PC) mobile workstation with all firewalls disabled to be able to access the images. A separate mouse is highly recommended.

Learning Objectives: At the conclusion of this workshop, participants will be able to: (1) describe the fundamental principles, workflow, strengths, and limitations of Postmortem Computed Tomography (PMCT) in medicolegal death investigation; (2) recognize expected postmortem imaging findings, common interpretive pitfalls, and key radiologic-pathologic correlations necessary for accurate PMCT interpretation; (3) apply a systematic approach to interpreting PMCT examinations during interactive case review; (4) discuss the role of forensic imaging in human identification, pediatric forensic investigations, forensic anthropology, and crime scene documentation; (5) explain current applications of three-dimensional visualization, three-dimensional printing, and advanced post-processing techniques in forensic practice; (6) identify emerging technologies — including artificial intelligence and evolving forensic imaging workflows — that are shaping the future of medicolegal investigations; and (7) integrate forensic imaging findings within a multidisciplinary medicolegal framework to enhance collaboration among radiologists, forensic pathologists, death investigators, anthropologists, and other forensic professionals.

Impact Statement: This workshop advances the integration of PMCT into medicolegal death investigation by offering practical guidance, case-based learning, and global expertise. Participants will gain essential skills for implementing and interpreting PMCT, explore its application in diverse death scenarios, and understand its value in legal proceedings. By fostering international collaboration and highlighting emerging technologies, this program supports the standardization and broader adoption of PMCT in forensic practice.

Target Audience: Anthropology, Criminalistics, Engineering & Applied Sciences, Forensic Nursing Science, General, Jurisprudence, Odontology, Pathology/Biology
Knowledge Level: Basic

Pre-Registration Required — $400

8:00 am – 5:00 pm

Chair: 
Michael J. Salyards, PhD 
Center for Statistics and Applications in Forensic Evidence
Tucson, AZ

Co-Chair: 
Alicia L. Carriquiry, PhD 
Iowa State University
Ames, IA

Presenters:
Erin P. Forry, MS 
SNA International
Milton, MA

John Paul Jones II, MBA 
National Institute of Standards and Technology
Gaithersburg, MD

Ashraf Mozayani, PhD 
Texas Southern University
Houston, TX

Pamela L. Sale, BS 
ANSI National Accreditation Board
Magnolia, TX

Program Description: ISO 21043:2025 is the first comprehensive international standard to address the forensic process from scene to courtroom. As laboratories, accreditation bodies, educators, and forensic practitioners begin evaluating its implications, understanding not only what the standard requires, but why it was developed and how it can be implemented, has become increasingly important.

This full-day interactive workshop provides participants with a practical, insider's guide to ISO 21043:2025. Led by instructors who participated directly in the international drafting and consensus process, the workshop examines each of the five parts of the standard while explaining the rationale behind its requirements, the scientific principles on which it is based, and its relationship to existing forensic practice. Participants will explore the role of Part 1 (Vocabulary) in establishing a common forensic lexicon, Part 2 (Recognition, Recording, Collecting, Transport, and Storage) in promoting the integrity and continuity of evidence, and Part 3 (Analysis) in addressing analytical strategy, validation, measurement uncertainty, and performance monitoring. A dedicated session on the statistical foundations of forensic interpretation will prepare attendees for an in-depth examination of Part 4 (Interpretation), including propositions, evaluative and investigative interpretation, likelihood ratios, categorical opinions, and the communication of evidential weight. The workshop concludes with Part 5 (Reporting), focusing on reporting requirements, communication of results, and testimony considerations.

Beyond explaining the requirements of the standard, the workshop will address implementation considerations for laboratories and practitioners, including its relationship to ISO/IEC 17025 accreditation, accreditation body expectations, and contemporary forensic guidance such as the Department of Justice Uniform Language for Testimony and Reports (ULTRs) and relevant OSAC and ASB standards. Participants will also engage in open discussion of current scientific and professional issues surrounding terminology, evaluative reporting, categorical opinions, source conclusions, and future revisions of the standard.

The workshop is designed to be highly interactive, with opportunities for questions and discussion throughout the day. As an additional benefit, each participant will receive a copy of all five parts of the ISO 21043:2025 series as part of the workshop registration fee. Attendees will leave with both a comprehensive reference set and the knowledge needed to evaluate, implement, and critically apply this landmark international standard within their own organizations.

Learning Objectives: This workshop provides a comprehensive review of the development, structure, and implementation of the ISO 21043:2025 series, Forensic Sciences. Participants will gain an understanding of the international drafting and consensus process that produced the standard, its relationship to existing forensic practice, and the opportunities and challenges associated with its implementation. Specifically, the workshop will: 

• Review the international ISO standards development process and the drafting and consensus procedures that produced the ISO 21043:2025 series
• Examine the purpose, scope, and key provisions of each of the five parts of ISO 21043:2025, including Part 1 (Vocabulary), Part 2 (Recognition, Recording, Collecting, Transport, and Storage of Items), Part 3 (Analysis), Part 4 (Interpretation), and Part 5 (Reporting) 
• Explain the probability and statistical concepts that underpin Part 4, including propositions, evaluative versus investigative interpretation, likelihood ratios, categorical opinions, and other approaches to expressing forensic opinions.
• Discuss how ISO 21043 complements laboratory accreditation under ISO/IEC 17025 and its anticipated implementation by accreditation bodies such as ANAB, as well as its relationship to guidance from major forensic stakeholder organizations.
• Explore current scientific and professional discussions surrounding selected provisions of the standard, including terminology, evaluative reporting, categorical opinions, source conclusions, and the consistency of ISO 21043 with contemporary United States forensic doctrine, Department of Justice Uniform Language for Testimony and Reports (ULTRs), and relevant OSAC/ASB standards and guidance. 

The workshop is intended to provide attendees with both a thorough understanding of the new ISO standard and an appreciation of the practical opportunities, implementation issues, and ongoing scientific discussions associated with its adoption throughout the forensic science community.

Impact Statement: ISO 21043:2025 is the first comprehensive international standard addressing the forensic process from scene to courtroom and is expected to influence forensic practice, laboratory accreditation, training, and future standards development worldwide. This workshop will equip forensic scientists, laboratory managers, quality professionals, accreditation assessors, educators, and other stakeholders with a practical understanding of the standard's development, structure, scientific foundations, and implementation. Participants will gain the knowledge needed to evaluate how ISO 21043 relates to existing laboratory-quality systems, including ISO/IEC 17025, and to contemporary forensic guidance in the United States and internationally. By examining both the strengths of the standard and areas of continuing scientific and professional discussion, attendees will be better prepared to make informed decisions regarding implementation, policy development, and future revisions of the standard. As an additional benefit, each workshop participant will receive a copy of the whole ISO 21043:2025 series (Parts I-V) as part of the workshop registration fee, providing a valuable reference for future use and implementation.

Target Audience: All Disciplines
Knowledge Level: Basic

Pre-Registration Required — $300

8:00 am – 5:00 pm

Chair: 
Gina Londino-Smolar, EdD 
IU Indianapolis
Indianapolis, IN

Co-Chair: 
Beth S. Saucier Goodspeed, MS 
Lasell University
Auburndale, MA 

Presenters:
Kelly Crockett, MSFS 
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University
Prescott, AZ

Chandra Finaughty, MPhil 
Wildlife Forensic Academy
Cape Town, South Africa

Devin A. Finaughty, PhD 
Wildlife Forensic Academy
Cape Town, South Africa

Paul Micah Johnson, PhD 
FBI
Brighton, MI 

Gregory E. Laskowski, MPA
CSI, LLC
Bakersfield, CA

Cheryl Feddern Nelson, DVM 
Nelson Reproductive Services
Versailles, KY

Carl Smith 
Paragon Service Group
Charlotte, NC

Ashley Spicer, MSc 
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Sacramento, CA

Gregory S. Wales, DFS
Independent Forensic Researcher
Colorado Springs, CO

Program Description: Forensic science is often associated with controlled laboratory settings and clearly defined crime scenes; however, many investigations unfold in locations where environmental conditions, accessibility, technology, mobility, and jurisdictional complexities significantly influence investigative strategies and outcomes. This workshop examines how forensic professionals successfully apply and adapt foundational investigative principles when operating beyond traditional crime scene boundaries.

Bringing together experts from diverse forensic disciplines, this workshop will showcase real-world case studies and research from wildlife crime investigations, concealed digital evidence searches, commercial aircraft terrorism investigations, offshore disaster response, veterinary forensic cases, endangered species poaching investigations, and emerging extraterrestrial crime scene concepts. Presenters will discuss how factors such as remote locations, environmental degradation, mobile crime scenes, evidentiary limitations, technological challenges, and multi-jurisdictional coordination affect evidence recognition, collection, preservation, and interpretation.

Topics include multidisciplinary approaches to wildlife crime investigations in South Africa; the utilization of electronic detection canines to locate hidden digital evidence; forensic processing of a commercial aircraft following the attempted bombing of Northwest Airlines Flight 253; digital forensic operations associated with the Deepwater Horizon criminal investigation; the forensic consequences of delayed evidence recovery in a high-profile equine poisoning case; complex wildlife forensic analyses involving contamination and species identification; an 11-agency investigation into the poaching of an endangered California condor; and the future implications of crime scene investigation beyond Earth.

While the environments represented vary dramatically, a common theme emerges: successful forensic investigations require adherence to core scientific principles while adapting techniques, technologies, and collaborative practices to address unique investigative challenges. Through presentations and an interactive panel discussion, participants will gain practical insights into the evolving nature of crime scene investigation and the innovative approaches necessary to meet future forensic challenges.

Consistent with the mission of the Forensic Science Foundation, all proceeds from this workshop will support student scholarships, educational programming, and research initiatives that advance the forensic sciences.

Learning Objectives: This workshop will explore how forensic professionals apply and adapt fundamental crime scene principles when investigations occur in unconventional, complex, or emerging environments. Through case studies involving wildlife crime, concealed digital evidence, commercial aviation terrorism, offshore disaster investigations, veterinary forensic cases, endangered species poaching, and future extraterrestrial crime scene concepts, participants will evaluate the unique challenges that influence evidence recognition, documentation, preservation, and interpretation. Attendees will examine how environmental, technological, operational, and jurisdictional factors impact forensic decision-making and identify strategies for maintaining scientific integrity and effective interdisciplinary collaboration. Upon completion of this workshop, participants will be able to apply lessons learned from uncommon crime scenes to improve investigative planning, evidence recovery, and case outcomes within their own areas of practice.

Impact Statement: This workshop will enhance the competence of forensic practitioners by broadening their understanding of how crime scene investigations must be adapted to meet the challenges of unusual and non-traditional environments. Through real-world case studies and multidisciplinary perspectives, attendees will gain practical approaches for improving evidence recognition, preservation, scene management, and collaboration across agencies and disciplines. These insights will support more effective forensic investigations, strengthen stakeholder confidence, and ultimately improve investigative and judicial outcomes.

Target Audience: All Disciplines
Knowledge Level: Basic

Pre-Registration Required — $300

8:00 am – 5:00 pm

Chair: 
Laura Hernandez, MEng 
Forensic and Scientific Testing, Inc.
Las Cruces, NM

Co-Chair: 
Brenda B. Christy, MS 
Virginia Department of Forensic Science
Norfolk, VA

Presenter: 
Kimberly S. Kunkler, PhD 
Harris County Institute of Forensic Sciences
Houston, TX

Program Description: Recent years have seen substantial advances in the standardization of fire debris analysis. Following extensive collaboration among ASTM International, the Organization of Scientific Area Committees (OSAC) for Forensic Science, and members of the fire debris community, the ASTM standards governing the identification, classification, and interpretation of ignitable liquid residues have undergone significant revision and have now been published. These standards provide a more comprehensive framework for fire debris analysis and establish updated expectations for laboratory practice.

A 2024 AAFS workshop introduced the forensic community to the major revisions while they were still under development. Since that time, the standards have matured through the consensus process and are now published and available for implementation. As laboratories begin adopting these requirements, many are discovering that successful implementation may require modifications to their current analytical procedures, interpretation practices, quality documentation, training programs, and laboratory workflows. 

This workshop focuses on the practical implementation of ASTM E1618-25 Standard Test Method for Identification of Ignitable Liquids in Fire Debris Analysis by Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry and ASTM E3407-25 Standard Classification for Ignitable Liquids Encountered in Fire Debris Analysis. A brief overview of these standards will be provided, including discussion of the relationship between them, and their roles in the overall analytical process. Presenters will also address some common questions and implementation challenges identified by the fire debris community. The remainder of the workshop will concentrate on application of the standards to realistic casework scenarios. The use of guided discussions with practical examples will be used to help attendees evaluate and interpret instrumental data, apply the revised classification framework, consider interpretation complications commonly encountered in casework, explore documentation approaches, and practice report writing in accordance with the revised standards. Emphasis will be placed on strategies for achieving consistent application of the standards across cases and laboratories.

This workshop is best suited for forensic practitioners who perform fire debris analysis, but it is also useful for technical leaders, quality personnel, laboratory managers, and other stakeholders. Attendees will leave with a more detailed understanding of the standards and practical guidance that can be applied immediately to support implementation within their laboratories. They will also gain experience and increased confidence with practical application of the standards to routine and complex casework, which will help promote consistency across the fire debris analysis community.

Learning Objectives: After completing this workshop, attendees will: (1) understand the relationship between ASTM E1618-25 and ASTM E3407-25 and their role in the analysis of fire debris evidence; (2) be better prepared to evaluate the operational, technical, and quality assurance changes necessary to implement the standards within their laboratories; and (3) have experience applying the requirements of the standards to ignitable liquid classification, data interpretation, documentation, and reporting through case-based exercises and interactive discussion.

Impact Statement: The recent publication of ASTM E1618-25 and ASTM E3407-25 represents one of the most significant advancements in fire debris analysis practice in decades. Successful implementation of these standards depends not only on understanding the standards, but also on the ability to incorporate them into workflows effectively and to apply them consistently during casework. This workshop will provide attendees with hands-on experience using the standards to classify ignitable liquids, evaluate analytical data, document findings, and communicate conclusions. It will also provide practical guidance and implementation strategies that promote consistency, scientific rigor, and defensible conclusions across the fire debris community.

Target Audience: Criminalistics, General, Jurisprudence
Knowledge Level: Intermediate

Pre-Registration Required — $165

1:00 pm – 5:00 pm

Chair:
Edward Sisco, PhD 
National Institute of Standards and Technology
Gaithersburg, MD

Co-Chair:
Sarah A. Shuda, MS 
National Institute of Standards and Technology
Gaithersburg, MD

Program Description: Mass Spectrometry (MS), especially when coupled to a chromatographic technique like gas chromatography (GC, GC/MS), is one of the most widely used analytical tools for forensic chemistry disciplines. From identification of controlled substances in a seized drug sample to the determination of an ignitable liquid in debris from a suspected arson scene, mass spectral data underpins many conclusions. Interpretation of mass spectral data can range from straightforward to highly complex, depending on available spectral libraries, knowledge of fragmentation patterns, and type of analysis conducted.

As samples become more complex, the importance of data analysis tools that can deconvolute chromatographic data, comprehensively search spectra, or assist in identifying unknowns becomes more critical. In this workshop, participants will gain hands-on experience with the NIST mass spectral analysis tools to sharpen their ability to interact with and interpret complex data. Beginning with a refresher of the fundamentals, participants will be re-familiarized with what a mass spectrum is, types of mass spectrometers available, and an overview of ionization approaches. Following this, participants will be shown how to use tools like MS Search, AMDIS, MS Interpreter, and others through a series of exercises and examples. A range of examples, from simple identifications of known compounds to identification of complete unknowns, will be discussed.

The workshop will also cover how to work with different types of mass spectral data, including Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS), Liquid Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (LC/MS), and Ambient Ionization/Mass Spectrometry (AI/MS) data. Examples using low-resolution and high-resolution mass spectral data will also be provided. In addition to working through provided examples, participants are encouraged to bring examples with them that they would like to work through with the group.

This workshop is intended for those with a beginner to intermediate background in mass spectrometry or those interested in learning more about mass spectral techniques outside of their area of expertise. Examples presented in this workshop will focus mainly on seized drugs and toxicology, though examples of how to apply these approaches to other disciplines will be discussed. This workshop will not cover inorganic or elemental mass spectrometry and will not explicitly discuss quantitative analysis.

Learning Objectives: Mass spectrometry is a key analytical tool in nearly every forensic chemist's toolbox, generating critical data to support the identification of known and unknown compounds in complex samples. In this workshop, attendees will learn how to maximize their ability to interrogate and interpret mass spectral data using the freely-available National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) mass spectral data analysis tools. Specifically, attendees will gain hands-on experience using NIST MS Search, AMDIS, and MS Interpreter, among other tools, to analyze simple and complex data, representative of what may be encountered in casework.

Impact Statement: This workshop will provide forensic practitioners, researchers, and students with the necessary skills to better understand, interrogate, and interpret mass spectra within the context of forensic chemistry. After attending this workshop, participants will have a better understanding of the available software resources and spectral libraries to assist in mass spectral interpretation. Attendees will also gain hands-on experience using these tools and will be provided with example data files to work through.

Target Audience: Criminalistics, General, Toxicology
Knowledge Level: Intermediate

Pre-Registration Required — $165

1:00 pm – 5:00 pm

Chair: 
Alex J. Krotulski, PhD 
CFSRE
Horsham, PA

Co-Chair: 
Donna M. Papsun, MS 
NMS Labs
Horsham, PA

Presenters: 
Ponni Arunkumar, MD 
Cook County Medical Examiner's Office
Chicago, IL

Max T. Denn, MS 
CFSRE
Horsham, PA

John P. May, MD 
Centurion Health
Miami, FL

Larry Justin Wilks
Cook County Sheriff's Office
Chicago, IL

Program Description: The smuggling and surreptitious use of illicit drugs within correctional facilities (e.g., jails, prisons) represents a critical intersection of population health, institutional safety, and forensic science. Incarcerated populations experience disproportionately higher rates of substance use disorders, making these individuals especially vulnerable to health consequences and adverse events associated with contraband drug exposure. Adverse outcomes include non-fatal overdoses, withdrawal complications, long-term morbidity, and fatalities. For correctional staff, the presence of unknown or emerging substances introduces occupational risks, including managing behavioral and medical emergencies. Death investigations of incarcerated individuals, especially after interactions with law enforcement, are highly contentious. Full forensic autopsy and comprehensive toxicology testing are increasingly critical aspects of these investigations.

With the rise of highly potent synthetic drugs, including novel synthetic opioids and synthetic cannabinoids, the toxicological landscape of substances involved in prison exposures has expanded. Illicit substances are increasingly being seen smuggled into correctional facilities through novel concealment mechanisms, including impregnation of novel drugs on inert materials, like legal mail, greeting cards, magazine pages, and clothing. The diversity and complexity surrounding potent novel substances creates surveillance and detection challenges, which have required significant collaboration between stakeholders for appropriate responses. Testing of confiscated samples is often limited, and rarely do routine forensic crime laboratory quantify the substances present.

NPS are increasingly being reported in carceral deaths, but the extent of the problem is poorly defined due to patchwork surveillance, variable investigative policies, lack of comprehensive testing, and other challenging aspects. Since the rebounding of synthetic cannabinoid markets beginning around 2024, the number of deaths involving these substances in jails has increased. Additionally, during this timeframe, novel synthetic opioids (e.g., nitazene analogs) have also appeared in biological specimens and drug materials from correctional settings. This workshop will highlight the need for comprehensive toxicological testing and considerations of interpretation of results.

Learning Objectives: The goals of this workshop are to: (1) describe the current landscape of Novel Psychoactive Substances (NPS) encountered in carceral settings, including specific drugs, routes of introduction into correctional facilities, analytical challenges associated with their detection, and the public health and safety risks they pose to incarcerated individuals and correctional staff; (2) recognize the clinical manifestations and toxicological features associated with intoxication from emerging drugs in incarcerated populations and discuss evidence-informed approaches to the medical evaluation, stabilization, and management of individuals experiencing acute adverse effects, including life-threatening toxicity; and (3) evaluate how toxicological surveillance and timely identification of emerging substances can inform correctional policies, prevention strategies, and multidisciplinary interventions designed to reduce drug-related morbidity and mortality, enhance institutional safety, and improve preparedness for future emerging drug threats.

Impact Statement: This cross-disciplinary workshop will highlight the need for integrated public health strategies, improved analytical capabilities, and enhanced collaboration to mitigate drug-related harms in correctional settings related to NPS.

Target Audience: Forensic Nursing Science, General, Jurisprudence, Pathology/Biology, Toxicology
Knowledge Level: Basic

Pre-Registration Required — $165

1:00 pm – 5:00 pm

Chair:
Mark T. Goff, BA 
Michigan State Police
Lansing, MI

Co-Chair: 
Kate Butler, BS 
Florida Department of Law Enforcement
Pensacola, FL

Program Description: FDEs participate in many standardized examinations for research and testing. These examinations are typically reported using an abbreviated conclusion scale consisting of five points: two degrees of association, two degrees of non-association, and an indeterminate option. In these standardized examinations, the FDE is often asked to express opinions about altered items or multiple writers, where the ground truth is known.

While standardization and ground truth answers are beneficial for mass testing, they may not be representative of the true conclusions expressed by qualified FDEs. For example, an examiner may be asked to examine the known writing of two writers against a questioned sample, where the ground truth is known. With suitable samples, a qualified FDE should reliably identify the correct writer; however, there can be a disconnect in how the results of the second writer are reported. Often, an identification opinion for one writer will generate an elimination opinion for the remaining writer(s). This elimination result may be the correct ground truth answer, BUT is most likely NOT able to be reached using the samples provided. Frequently, the true answer should be something less than an elimination if separated from the identification opinion.

In this workshop, attendees can expect to learn about the history of proficiency testing and its evolution within the forensic sciences as well as the current methods of reaching consensus answers, specifically in Document Examination. The instruction will also include a discussion on relevant FDE standards and accreditation considerations and an honest discussion about strategies to combat problematic conclusions in research, proficiency testing, and casework.

Learning Objectives: Attendees will learn in-depth background information on historical and current Forensic Document Examiner (FDE) proficiency testing and research testing, FDE standards, and accreditation considerations. Participation in the hands-on portion of the workshop will allow attendees to engage in critical thinking about how conclusions are expressed and how to explain the differences between consensus, ground truth, and evidence-supported results.

Impact Statement: This workshop will impact the forensic science community by illustrating the limitations of standardized testing, specifically as it relates to forensic document examination. In this workshop, attendees can expect to learn about the history of proficiency testing, its evolution within the forensic sciences as well as the current methods of reaching consensus answers, specifically in Document Examination. The instruction will also include a discussion on relevant FDE standards and accreditation considerations and an honest discussion about strategies to combat problematic conclusions in research, proficiency testing, and casework.

Target Audience: Questioned Documents
Knowledge Level: Basic 

Pre-Registration Required — $165

1:00 pm – 5:00 pm

Chair:
Dana Delger, JD 
Self Employed
Casper, WY

Co-Chair: 
Heather E. Waltke, MFS 
National Institute of Standards and Technology
Gaithersburg, MD

Presenter: 
Melissa Taylor, BA 
National Institute of Standards and Technology
Gaithersburg, PA

Program Description: Process mapping is essential for standardization, efficiency, and defensibility, is the foundation for identifying and implementing AI use case, and transforms forensic labs into data-driven, scalable, and intelligent systems.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), through its Organization of Scientific Area Committees (OSAC), has been working with practitioners in various forensic science disciplines to produce process maps that identify key decision points in the forensic examination process. Process maps are effective in capturing the complexity of and variation in analytical approaches used in forensic laboratories. Some maps that have been developed so far include disciplines such as Crime Scene Investigation (CSI), Firearm and Toolmarks, Footwear and Tire Examination, Friction Ridge, Human Forensic DNA Analysis, Wildlife Forensics, Handwriting, Fire Investigation, and Seized Drugs. 

Development of an innovative plan to use process maps as auditing tools for the evaluation of standards and best practices, to assess the potential for use of technologies such as Artificial Intelligence (AI) in forensic science, and to locate areas for increasing in laboratory efficiency. 

Process maps enable laboratory managers and other personnel to better understand how their protocols compare with those of other laboratories and provide a useful framework for developing standard operating procedures, best practice documents, potential areas for improved efficiency, including via the use of AI technology, and improved quality assurance measures.

This interactive workshop will assist attendees from the forensic science community in seeing the benefits of process mapping via the exploration of key topics, including:

• Evaluation of training and current practices
• Utilization in the standardization of forensic processes
• Identification of potential areas for improvement and strengthening of laboratory practices
• The potential for the use of AI technology for improving laboratory efficiency

At the end of the workshop, participants will understand the purpose and value of process mapping, how process maps can be used to inform potential responsible use of AI technology, how to increase efficiencies, and how maps can aid in the standardization of forensic processes and terminology.

Learning Objectives: This interactive workshop will assist attendees from the forensic science community in seeing the benefits of process mapping via the exploration of key topics, including evaluation of training and current practices, utilization in the standardization of forensic processes, identification of potential areas for improvement and strengthening of laboratory practices, and the potential for the use of AI technology for improving laboratory efficiency

Impact Statement: At the end of the workshop, participants will understand the purpose and value of process mapping, how process maps can be used to inform potential responsible use of AI technology, how to increase efficiencies, and how maps can aid in the standardization of forensic processes and terminology.

Target Audience: General
Knowledge Level: Basic